TheCollegeConservative.comPart of the vast, right-wing conspiracy.2016-12-09T15:13:42Zhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/feed/atom/WordPresshttp://thecollegeconservative.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/cropped-Tag-32x32.jpgTaylor Samuelsonhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=307612016-12-09T15:13:42Z2016-12-09T15:13:42ZAmerican millennials tend to forget that freedom is not free. And recent trends indicate that they may be sacrificing their freedoms without realizing the cost. Conflicts on college campuses show that some millennials are willing to abandon basic constitutional rights. Free speech is one example: many choose to become politically illiterate, or take no side, to […]

]]>American millennials tend to forget that freedom is not free. And recent trends indicate that they may be sacrificing their freedoms without realizing the cost.

Conflicts on college campuses show that some millennials are willing to abandon basic constitutional rights. Free speech is one example: many choose to become politically illiterate, or take no side, to avoid controversies. Further, Pew Research shows that 40% of millennials are okay with speech censorship when expression “could be offensive to minorities.”

With this abandonment of rights, some millennials are abandoning the right to vote. Only 46% of millennials voted in the 2012 election. Further, a recent study conducted by the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) shows that millennial voter turnout for Hillary Clinton was less than turnout for Obama in 2008 and 2012. Millennials voted 55% Democrat, 37% Republican, and 8% third party (a 5% increase from past elections). An estimated half of eligible voters cast ballots in 2016, but that statistic remains well below the national average.

Millennials who disregard the right to vote are shooting themselves in the foot. Further, progressive millennials who are now arguing over the results of the election, but didn’t vote, have missed the most basic point of elections. It’s is like yelling at your mother because she put the cookies away, but you never asked for one in the first place.

But millennials’ challenges go well beyond voting. Millennials know what the Constitution is, but don’t truly understand its importance. Socialism is a growing trend among younger college age voters. The ideas of Karl Marx and Lenin are more palatable than those of the “evil white racist men” who founded this country.

In a 2016 YouGov poll, 24% said that socialism was somewhat favorable, and 5% said that it was very favorable. Compiling these results, 29% of those polled felt positively towards socialism, while 30% felt very unfavorably. Andrew Mark Miller from CDN had some strong words in his analysis of millennials:

Young people today believe that socialism is cool, our founding document should be altered in order to not hurt anyone’s feelings and that a television star is a member of the most powerful governing body in the land.

While millennials may think Marx is cool, it’d be entirely different if they had to live in communism. Venezuela is an excellent example, as its residents are hunting dogs and cats to survive.

Without exposure to facts like these, the fate of Venezuela may come to America. Millennials’ political illiteracy largely stems from a university system that takes advantage of students, shoving liberal ideology down their throats as if it is science.

Ultimately, the future of this nation hinges on the civic engagement of our generation. Freedom is not free, and we can lose it. If America chooses to follow the path of apathy, communism, and anti-patriotism, freedom will be lost.

]]>0Abigail Hirnhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=307822016-12-09T14:44:53Z2016-12-09T14:44:53ZFollowing the pattern of the US election and Brexit, the emergence of populist resistance to stronger central governance has proven difficult for the progressive goals of the current Italian administration. Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has announced that he will resign from office following Monday’s referendum vote that went against his proposed constitutional reforms. The reforms […]

]]>Following the pattern of the US election and Brexit, the emergence of populist resistance to stronger central governance has proven difficult for the progressive goals of the current Italian administration.

Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has announced that he will resign from office following Monday’s referendum vote that went against his proposed constitutional reforms. The reforms largely focused on minimizing the role of Italy’s upper Senate in order to centralize power, and was met by strong opposition from right-wing populist parties.

President Sergio Mattarella, who serves as a largely ceremonial leader in Italy’s government, urged the Prime Minister to remain in office until the parliament approved the budget for 2017, which could occur as soon as later this week. The referendum vote also bolstered a platform for groups urging Italy to abandon the euro.

Voters saw the referendum vote as an opportunity to oust Renzi from power when he announced his winner-take-all strategy, pledging to resign if the reforms were rejected. In addition to the far right, members of Renzi’s own center-left Democratic Party (PD) campaigned for “no” votes. At this time, it remains unclear if Renzi will retain enough support from party members to remain as leader of the PD; a role that would give him a voice in selecting Italy’s next Prime Minister.

There was some clear solidarity amongst Italian voters. Two-thirds of eligible voters went out to the polls, with a final result of “no” votes reaching just above 59 percent. Italy’s economy has remained sluggish in past years, and Italy has been flooded as a migration crisis arrival point. The number of migrants from Africa has reached the hundreds of thousands.

Italy’s Five Star Movement, a rising populist party, could use this opportunity to gain power in the next election. Having campaigned against Renzi’s referendum, the party has also proposed a referendum for Italy to pull out of the euro zone in light of the country’s ongoing bank crisis.

The pattern of anti-establishment party popularity has emerged all over Europe, and Renzi’s resignation is part of the major shift of European leadership. In addition to the prominent right-wing coalitions in central European countries such as Hungary and Poland, support for populist parties has risen in traditionally leftist nations like Sweden, France, and Greece in the last few elections. As one of Europe’s four largest economies, Italy’s role on the international stage is significant, and it’s unclear what lies ahead.

]]>0Alan Lenczhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=307692016-12-08T07:28:29Z2016-12-08T07:28:29Z“Bottomless pig-ignorance & recklessness.” “A radical temporary deviation.” Such are the breathless reactions of the liberal politicians and media figures to Donald Trump’s phone conversation with the President of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-Wen. The short phone conversation indicates that President-elect Trump may be willing to break with the One China policy, which harks back to the […]

Reality check: China is a corrupt Communist-controlled dictatorship that suppresses the speech and information of its citizens. It has a terrible human rights record. Torture is an accepted political tool. Meanwhile, the country is seeking to expand its influence by limiting that of the U.S., bullying other countries and forcing them to cooperate. Oh yeah, and it props up the abusive, insane dictator of North Korea. Let’s be clear: American policy should seek to combat China and limit its influence. What, exactly, is wrong with supporting a democracy that respects human rights such as Taiwan, and not kowtowing to China and its communist rulers?

The Left loves to highlight America’s human-right failings, real or imagined. WWII-era detention of Japanese-Americans, American support of Chilean dictator Augustus Pinochet, and the use of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War are but a few of the litany of sins recited for confession at the Church of Condemnation of American Imperialism. Yet, so many liberals are strangely reticent when it comes to combating current abusive regimes such as China or Iran. Henry Kissinger or George W. Bush are labelled war criminals, yet cruel murderers like Fidel Castro and Che Guevara are romanticized and celebrated. Why the double standard?

]]>0Alex Christyhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=307422016-12-08T07:25:00Z2016-12-08T07:25:00ZCommander Logan Ramsey did not know what he was looking at on December 7, 1941, at 7:55 in the morning. It was probably a reckless American pilot. Suddenly realized what was happening and he rushed to the radio room and sent an uncoded message that read “AIR RAID ON PEARL HARBOR X THIS IS NOT […]

]]>Commander Logan Ramsey did not know what he was looking at on December 7, 1941, at 7:55 in the morning. It was probably a reckless American pilot. Suddenly realized what was happening and he rushed to the radio room and sent an uncoded message that read “AIR RAID ON PEARL HARBOR X THIS IS NOT DRILL.”

The Japanese had come to Pearl Harbor in an attempt to wipe out the US Pacific Fleet. It would a day that would “live in infamy.” Over 2,400 Americans were killed in the attack. It was a day that changed that changed the course of history.

The number of Pearl Harbor survivors is diminishing, they may not be around for the next big anniversary, this is why this anniversary in particular, we should remember their service.

The Battleships

Battleship Row was the main target for the attacking Japanese that day. The USS Arizona was one of those battleships. Arizona was hit by a number of bombs in the early going, one of those bombs penetrating the ship’s magazine causing a gigantic explosion. 1,177 of Arizona‘s crew died, almost half of the total casualties suffered that day. Damage to Arizona was so great, that she remains at the bottom of the harbor to this day.

The USS Arizona after the ship’s magazine detonated on December 7, 1941

The second greatest loss of life came aboard USS Oklahoma. Oklahomawas hit by eight torpedoes and capsized within the first ten minutes of the battle. 429 men died aboard the Oklahoma. The Oklahoma was raised, but ultimately the Navy concluded was not seaworthy.

Other battleships hit during the attack include the USS Nevada. Bombs are torpedoes forced Nevada to beach at Hospital Point. 57 men lost their lives on the Nevada. Nevada would later be retrieved and would do convoy duty in the Atlantic during the war. USS California was also eventually raised and saw action during the war after 100 men died during the attack. The USS West Virginia was struck by six torpedoes and two bombs during the raid and sunk causing 106 men to lose their lives. West Virginia was also salvaged in 1942.

Other Ships

Other ships that were sunk and later rescued include the minelayer USS Oglala and the harbor tug USS Sotoyomo. The only other ship to be permanently lost was the former battleship USS Utah, which had been destined to be used for target practice.

A number of cruisers and destroyers were also greatly damaged. Destroyers Cassin and Downes had to be rebuilt due to the damage they took.

Acts of Heroism

In all 16 men would be awarded the Medal of Honor that day, most posthumously. They include:

]]>0Nathan Federhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=306882016-12-08T07:22:28Z2016-12-08T07:22:28ZRosie O’Donnell and President-elect Donald Trump have a decade-long conflict. Their unusual relationship seems to have started in December 2006. After several disqualifying accusations against Miss USA Tara Conner, Trump didn’t fire her. At the time, Trump made a statement at a press conference unlike his usual “you’re fired” soundbite: “I’ve always been a believer […]

]]>Rosie O’Donnell and President-elect Donald Trump have a decade-long conflict. Their unusual relationship seems to have started in December 2006. After several disqualifying accusations against Miss USA Tara Conner, Trump didn’t fire her. At the time, Trump made a statement at a press conference unlike his usual “you’re fired” soundbite:

“I’ve always been a believer in second chances. Tara is a good person. Tara has tried hard. Tara is going to be given a second chance.”

Conner, at the time 21, was very appreciative and committed herself to rehab. Trump’s compassion might be related to his brother’s death, who in 1981 died due to his alcoholism.

Either way, Rosie O’Donnell expressed strong discontent the next day. O’Donnell, who joined “The View” three months prior, attacked Trump’s business integrity and efficacy. She then continued to comment on his multiple marriages. Ironically, though, both of them ended up having multiple marriages.

In 2011 and 2012, O’Donnell and Trump had ups-and-downs. Comments ranged from marriage attacks to good wishes post-surgery. The conflicts continued most famously into the presidential election. Most recently, O’Donnell shared a video via Twitter explaining why she believed Barron Trump, 10, might be autistic. In the Tweet she added:

“If so — what an amazing opportunity to bring attention to the AUTISM epidemic.”

Many have reacted with great disappointment and called the Tweet inappropriate. Producer Dave Erickson among others have implied that if the Trumps have as much of a responsibility to spread autism awareness, then perhaps O’Donnell has a responsibility to spread obesity awareness. Perhaps she’ll follow Stephen Hawkings‘ example in that field. Regarding suspicion that O’Donnell’s Tweet stemming from her dissidence with Donald, she clarified that they “had nothing to do with donald (sic).”

O’Donnell replied in a poem calling the video on her Tweet “educational and informational.” She excused her behavior explaining she was “immersed” in studying autism. Dakota, her daughter was diagnosed with High Functioning Autism. In O’Donnell defense, according to her instigating Tweet, she only wanted to raise awareness to autism as an epidemic. However, sources of her discussing Dakota’s autism before her clarification are scarce if at all existent.

Lesson learned? In her defense, Rosie finally apologizedto Melania Trump via Twitter saying she never meant any harm, but not a word from Donald. Will Rosie start advancing mental health before Donald chimes in?

]]>0Chris Beyerhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=307392016-12-06T16:40:46Z2016-12-06T16:40:46ZLast month, House Democrats again re-elected Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to minority leader, this time over the more centrist Tim Ryan (D-OH). The 134-63 vote suggests one thing: The Democrats are tone-deaf to the messages America is sending them. Following the vote, Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-OR), who publicly backed Tim Ryan for Minority Leader, said, “I’m very worried we […]

]]>Last month, House Democrats again re-elected Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to minority leader, this time over the more centrist Tim Ryan (D-OH). The 134-63 vote suggests one thing: The Democrats are tone-deaf to the messages America is sending them.

Following the vote, Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-OR), who publicly backed Tim Ryan for Minority Leader, said, “I’m very worried we just signed the Democratic Party’s death certificate.”

And he’s probably right.

On election night, America showed Democrats the door. Their coastal-elite, top-down, aggressive liberal approach to governing for the past decade abandoned American workers, ignored our international allies, and emboldened our enemies. When Democrats had a chance to take the Senate and White House, and increase their stakes in the House, American voters, especially rural voters, declined. Rural Americans voted 3-to-1 for Republicans over Democrats.

For them, the Affordable Care Act was a train wreck that sent their insurance costs skyrocketing. The healthcare policy that Nancy Pelosi sent through without reading, Obama considers his crowning achievement, and Hillary tried to double down on, was a disaster for ordinary, hard-working Americans. No one heard them.

Coastal liberals like Nancy Pelosi look down their nose at blue-collar heartland workers. The Democrats chose Hillary Clinton, Arkansas-native-turned urban, D.C. elitist as their candidate for President. Hillary, who Pelosi has fervently supported, held her rallies almost exclusively to large cities and urban areas, and her fundraisers with the Hollywood and DC elite. Again, the heartland was largely ignored.

In the races for U.S. Senate, Floridians had a Patrick Murphy, a rich, compulsory liar challenging Marco Rubio. Hoosiers had Evan Bayh, a man who has personally profited from votes. Wisconsinites had Russ Feingold, a tax-and-spend insider longing to be back in D.C.

In addition to failing in their bid to unseat Senator Roy Blunt, Missouri Democrats lost traction in the state legislature, and lost all five of the statewide executive offices. Chris Koster, the Democratic candidate for Missouri Governor, was arguably one of the most conservative Democrats to run this cycle — he was even endorsed by the NRA. Yet, voters rejected him because knew that behind him were the likes of Clinton and Pelosi.

Democrats lost by large margins in a number of states. They simply have no real bench of candidates who can connect with the average citizen.

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the current frontrunner for the DNC chairmanship, is extremely disconnected as well. He:

A man with a radical world view like this can’t possibly lead the Democratic Party back into prominence.

The Democrats are losing and will continue to lose so long as they keep intellectual, better-than-thou liberals at the helm of their party. When the 115th Congress convenes in 2017, over ⅓ of House Democrats will be from California, New York, and Massachusetts. Leading them will be Nancy Pelosi, the greatest cause for a Republican majority since 2010. Brushed aside will be Tim Ryan, possibly one of the only few Democrats who understands their party is in serious danger.

While the coastal Democrats continue to misunderstand the average American, flyover-country Democrats will do their best to bide their time until they, too, lose their seats.

]]>3Jeremy Beamanhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=307062016-12-05T05:22:11Z2016-12-05T16:00:47ZA recent 60 Minutes special shared the story of the US Women’s National Soccer Team, whose players recently voiced a desire to be paid as much as the men’s team. But unlike other recent fights over the “wage gap,” these ladies have legitimate complaints, considering that their team grosses more revenue. This case is certainly atypical for a discussion […]

]]>A recent 60 Minutes special shared the story of the US Women’s National Soccer Team, whose players recently voiced a desire to be paid as much as the men’s team. But unlike other recent fights over the “wage gap,” these ladies have legitimate complaints, considering that their team grosses more revenue.

This case is certainly atypical for a discussion of the wage gap, most obviously because it is the realm of professional sports. The women’s team hasn’t always grossed so much, and didn’t at the time the players signed their contracts. However, the ladies are now worth more in terms of monetary value, and deserve to be compensated accordingly.

This principle, that of monetary and skill value, ought to guide all of our discussions on this issue. Unfortunately, it doesn’t.

In September, The Institute for Women’s Policy Research released its findings on the gender wage gap from FY 2015. IWPR concluded that women’s median annual earnings, for full-time and year-round workers, were about 79.6 percent of men’s earnings. It also found that women’s median weekly earnings for full-time work were about 81.1 percent.

These numbers might appear shocking, but only to those who don’t recognize workplace dynamics. The numbers tell us what the wage gap is, but say nothing about why it exists.

Of the highest paying professions, women make up only a small portion. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, women make up 35% of all professionals involved in securities, commodities, funds, trusts, and other financial investments. They make up only 25% of those involved in architecture, engineering, and computer systems design.

The wage gap largely arises from this fact. IWPR fails to consider these labor dynamics, including only information about race and wage–not occupational breakdowns.

Vanessa Brown Calder of the Cato Institute summarizes the findings of a Glassdoor study, along with other studies, as follows:

Women are making 95 cents for every dollar men are making, once you compare men and women with similar educational, experiential, and professional characteristics.

The problem isn’t that IWPR’s numbers, or even those of BLS, are wrong. The problem is that they simply don’t indicate what wage gappers want them to indicate.

IWPR and other wage gappers want people to believe that a female worker–one with the same level of education, same skill set, and same level of revenue-earning value as a male worker–earns significantly less, simply because she is a woman. It’s a simple analysis that fits a progressive worldview. However, the numbers don’t support that hypothesis across the board.

Except, perhaps, in the case of the U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team. But that’s why the soccer team is so important: it’s the exception, not the rule.

]]>0Sam Leanzahttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=306752016-12-05T04:31:26Z2016-12-05T16:00:20ZAmerica’s classic Christmas movie It’s a Wonderful Life turns 70 this year. It’s aged gracefully like a fine wine, but it’s not without its detractors. For some, the revered film is a sort of political prop to suck all the fun out of Christmas. The plot is based on Phillip Van Doren Stern’s short story, […]

]]>America’s classic Christmas movie It’s a Wonderful Life turns 70 this year. It’s aged gracefully like a fine wine, but it’s not without its detractors. For some, the revered film is a sort of political prop to suck all the fun out of Christmas.

The plot is based on Phillip Van Doren Stern’s short story, “The Greatest Gift.” It follows the life of George Bailey, who is ingeniously played by James Stewart in the film. Bailey is a dreamer who just wants shake “the dust of this crummy little town off [his] feet and…see the world.” That crummy little town is Bedford Falls. With the help of Clarence Oddbody, Angel Second Class, George comes to realize just how much the people of Bedford Falls rely on his compassionate contributions to the town’s livelihood. He truly is the richest man in town.

Small-town Americana is a trigger for the left. Strong family structures and localized economies just aren’t their thing. Some even claim that Mr. Potter–the film’s villain, a wealthy miser who tries to snap up most of the businesses in Bedford Falls–should have been the hero! After all, how on earth could George Bailey not buy into Mr. Potter’s progressive utopia?

This is not the only criticism, of course. They also talk about its alleged atheistic, communist agenda, or how the movie is actually too dark for Christmas. Some have claimed that it is really a metaphor for the crony capitalist oppression to which America eventually succumbed.

Maybe I’m biased because it’s my favorite movie, but I think It’s a Wonderful Life is actually about the redemption of a man who’s forgotten, or perhaps never realized, what makes life, well, wonderful. It’s not about the glamour and glitz; rather, it’s about the people in your community, the God you serve, and the difference you make. Underneath George Bailey’s epic journey, we get a glimpse of small town America where the local community is strong. And that’s what conservatism is all about.

As this turbulent year draws to a close, I hope this film gives you and yours a renewed sense of hope for mankind and love for your neighbors.

]]>0Zigmund Reichenbachhttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=306912016-12-04T17:55:14Z2016-12-04T17:55:14ZTurning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk’s website The Professor Watchlist created a social-media stir, causing public backlash against the network.

]]>Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk’s website The Professor Watchlist created a social-media stir, causing public backlash against the network for being “McCarthy-like” and “Orwellian“. However, the site’s existence prompts broader discussion about professorial speech. Two important questions to consider are:

What are the limitations on a professor’s free speech?

Do colleges harbor dangerous people intent on undermining America?

Many think these questions should not be entertained. However before dismissing them we should examine the facts. And the facts suggest there are limitations on free speech even for professors.

Consider the standard answer to question 1. Typically people cite “free speech” and think professors can say anything. That’s not true. There are numerous Supreme Court cases imposing limitations on speech rights. Two important cases pertain to this discussion.

In Schenck v. United States, the Supreme Court determined if “ words … are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger” then a citizen’s first amendment rights are not protected.

In Brandenburg v. Ohio the court developed “a two pronged test to evaluate speech acts that (1) speech can be prohibited if it is ‘directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and (2) it is ‘likely to incite or produce such action.’” Accordingly free speech protection is forfeited if and only if both conditions are violated.

With this in mind lets look at what’s going on in university system:

One professor encourages students to participate in an “EcoSexual Sextravaganza” where students celebrate lust for environmental objects.

Now is there a problem with professorial speech? Do these speech acts demonstrate imminent lawless action? Do professors words facilitate violence? What do you think?

In the author’s opinion, these professors’ actions should elicit bipartisan concern. Without enforcing existing speech law, or without professors voluntarily exercising the same prudent speech restraint they expect from students, it becomes difficult to think universities are actually protecting their students.

]]>0Edward Brookshttp://thecollegeconservative.com/?p=305642016-12-03T22:42:45Z2016-12-03T22:42:45ZEveryone should agree by now that with a wide range of differing viewpoints, the most beneficial one to humanity will prevail. That remains true especially when you look at the timeline of history on a large scale. For example, it may be said that World War II had to happen in order to show militant […]

]]>Everyone should agree by now that with a wide range of differing viewpoints, the most beneficial one to humanity will prevail. That remains true especially when you look at the timeline of history on a large scale. For example, it may be said that World War II had to happen in order to show militant antisemitism for the contemptuous horror it is. We couldn’t have benefitted from sweeping it under the rug, just like sex in the Victorian era. We now recognise that humans of all creeds, persuasions and ethnic backgrounds must be allowed the right to be heard. Similarly, the rest of society must be allowed the right to hear those mutterings, nice or nasty.

That’s where the 21st century bourgeoisie can be introduced. They’re the most privileged group of animals to ever grace the Earth, and they’ve forgotten what makes them the righteous founders of modern liberal society. ‘Diversity’ is their ultimate buzzword, and granted, ‘buzzword’ is my buzzword, but diversity doesn’t do anything for the good of the world if it’s being directed to irrelevant areas. These areas include the very things that don’t or shouldn’t subdivide our species: race, sexuality, gender.

Diversity of race is ideal, sure, but given that race says nothing about someone’s personality, we should let the chips of migration fall where they may. The equivalent can be said of sexuality and gender. The only important diversity is diversity of opinion, i.e. the very last piece of the puzzle that is being suppressed in ‘liberal’ discourse today. Maybe we ought to refrain from using the term ‘political correctness’ because it seems it may have been dumbed down by repetition to nothing punchy at all. However, if we each were to read Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and take a crash course in 20th century history we could all learn a thing or two about the dynamics of humanity.

By the way, don’t look up ‘racial differences’. You’ll be swimming in percentages, graphs and analyses that are to be read by anthropologists or whatever, and I’m asking you not to look at them, please.